When is it ok for a cruise captain to abandon ship?

[thermal]

I just finished reading about the Costa Concordia incident, and that the Captain is in jail.  My understanding is that he fell into a lifeboat and subsequently abandoned ship. 
 

On the other hand, I would find it hard to believe that in modern times the captain is expected to go down with the ship like in Titanic (please correct me if I’m wrong).  
 

So when is it appropriate for the captain to abandon ship?  Some kind of middle ground?  

Edited April 29 by thermal

[GeezerCouple]

9 minutes ago, thermal said:

I just finished reading about the Costa Concordia incident, and that the Captain is in jail.  My understanding is that he fell into a lifeboat and subsequently abandoned ship. 
 

On the other hand, I would find it hard to believe that in modern times the captain is expected to go down with the ship like in Titanic (please correct me if I’m wrong).  
 

So when is it appropriate for the captain to abandon ship?  Some kind of middle ground?  

 

Do you mean, like leave the ship while there are still passengers on board!??

😱

Do you really think that the Costa Concordia captain "FELL" into that lifeboat?

If so, I have this bridge for sale... 😉 

 

GC

[Donald]

Easy answer. The Captain (overall in command and completely responsible), and the Hotel Manager (responsible for evacuating all crew and pax) wait until all crew and pax are accounted for and evacuated.

Then they can leave the ship on one of the final boats or rafts.

 

On the Costa Concordia, three officers received prison sentences. The Hotel Manager received the longest sentence.

Only the Captain - or someone designated by him - can signal Abandon Ship. Under International Law, nobody can abandon ship until the Captain makes that command. On Concordia, everyone was waiting for the Captain to make the Command - but he was not onboard. The Hotel Manager was managing the evacuation, but could not send pax to the boats without the Masters Command.

When pax tried to go to the boats, the Hotel Manager sent them back to their cabins to wait for the Abandon Ship Command that never came. Those pax died in their cabins.

[chengkp75]

Let's get some facts straight about the Concordia.  Schettino was onboard, and did signal "abandon ship".  What he failed to do was to sound the "fire and general emergency" alarm, which sends passengers to their muster stations, and which most cruise passengers mistakenly believe is the "abandon ship" signal.  Secondly, the Hotel Manager is not "responsible for evacuating all crew and pax", he directs the crew responsible for mustering the passengers, under the Captain's direction.  Since the signal to muster passengers was not made, the crew rightly sent the passengers away from the muster locations.  What should have happened, was that as soon as Schettino was notified that there was flooding in the engine room (about 7 minutes after striking the rock), the passenger muster signal should have been made, and the muster completed, ensuring that all passengers were accounted for.  Then, when he was informed that 4 watertight compartments were flooding (about 2 minutes after being told of the flooding, and which meant that the ship was going to sink no matter what was done), he should have announced that the passengers should get into the boats, and evacuate.  Once, the passengers were evacuated, then you sound the "abandon ship" signal, as this releases the crew from their "fire and general emergency" stations (where many have worked to muster and evacuate the passengers), and send the crew to their abandon ship stations.  Schettino called for "abandon ship" without having the passengers mustered, nor without the passengers having been evacuated first.  Schettino's claim that he "fell" into the boat is ridiculous on its merits, and even to say this shows that he waited far too long to get the passengers to safety.  And, finally, the Staff Captain on a cruise ship is a fully accredited Captain, equal to the Captain, and can order the abandon ship if the Captain is not capable of doing so.

 

As for the OP's question.  I have stated above, the sequence of events that take place in a ship evacuation.  Passengers and the 3 crew assigned to man each lifeboat evacuate the ship.  Then, the crew report to their abandon ship stations, and when the Captain signals time to abandon ship, the crew will board the liferafts and evacuate.  The Captain and the bridge officers are typically assigned to one raft, and the Captain will hold that raft until the last.

 

And, as for reading about the Concordia, I know that there are a lot of "factual" accounts out there that in no way relate to what happened that night, but I recommend reading the official investigation report by the Italian Ministry of Transport:

 

https://www.transportes.gob.es/recursos_mfom/2012costaconcordia.pdf

Edited April 29 by chengkp75

[chengkp75]

Further to the OP's question, there is, nor has there ever been, a law saying that "the Captain goes down with the ship".  There is no requirement that the Captain give up his/her life on a sinking ship, nor even that they be among the last to abandon the ship.  However, the Captain has personal responsibility for the lives of passengers and crew, and for the vessel, and so by abandoning the ship early, can run afoul if people die as a result of the Captain leaving the ship (Concordia), or if the ship fails to subsequently sink.  If a ship is found afloat with no one onboard, salvage law allows the next person to set foot on the ship to possess it, and be entitled to sell it and it's contents (even passenger belongings), so abandoning a ship is a serious calculation.

[MBP&O2/O]

I was on a ship that sank due, in the main, to a flooded engine room.

The engine room alarm sounded at 1115 .... no other alarms were sounded at that time. 

I went to the bridge at 1150 with a view to recalculating my 'noon' sights as we had stopped.

The captain was on the bridge and when he saw me he told me to get a Dead Reckoning position and give it to the Radio Officer as we were sinking.

Thirty five minutes from the initial alarm to knowing the ship was effectively lost!

By 1230 we had lost all power. We were a 'dead ship'. 

 

Our plan of action was to muster all crew members to a place of safety, and literally play it by ear.

 

We were well of the beaten track and had to wait for help and hope that we kept afloat until the help arrived.

 

The next day, the assistance arrived and an attempt was made to transfer all non essential crew and officers wives to the ship which had come to assist. Having completed this, the lifeboat was to return to the ship and be used again, if necessary, to evacuate the remainder of the crew who would stay on board whilst awaiting a salvage tug to arrive.

 

The big fly in the ointment was that we only had that one lifeboat as the three others had been wrecked - on the davits - due to the appalling weather conditions, and those weather conditions caused the lifeboat to flounder and fill with water, and it could not return to the Mother Ship 🙂 in fact it never reached the rescue ship so we were sat in a flooded boat for a considerable amount of time.

 

The point is that the safety and preservation of life was paramount and all efforts were made to ensure this happened. All decisions are made with the information available at that time. Nothing is constant and each ship will have different circumstances to contend with.

 

The master, I am told, was last off the ship.

[wcook]

I had a long post written out, but I think it’s better to agree with an above poster. Read the official inquest report. Warning: it will piss you off greatly. So many people behaved badly. 
 

Side note: There have been a couple airline incidents where passengers were furious that the captain not only wasn’t the last person but actually pushed people out of the way to be the first person off a “crashed” airplane. Turned out it was the first officer doing exactly what they were supposed to do as they were going out to make sure things were safe for evacuating passengers. So while the Concordia captain and senior officers deserve every bit of the scorn they received (and more) it’s often hard for passengers to judge. 

Edited April 29 by wcook

[CruiserBruce]

27 minutes ago, wcook said:

.... So many people behaved badly. 
 

Side note: There have been a couple airline incidents where passengers were furious that the captain not only wasn’t the last person but actually pushed people out of the way to be the first person off a “crashed” airplane. Turned out it was the first officer doing exactly what they were supposed to do as they were going out to make sure things were safe for evacuating passengers. So while the Concordia captain and senior officers deserve every bit of the scorn they received (and more) it’s often hard for passengers to judge. 

Everyone is an expert in how emergency responders should do their jobs. It always takes us too long to get to emergencies (like we don't like to drive with lights and sirens to calls, but then some complain we make too much noise arriving)...the list of expert advice we get could fill a War and Peace sized novel. And a second novel on people's illogical and selfish behavior.

 

Not absolving the caption of Concordia one bit. But have seen far to many people behaving badly in emergencies...

 

35 years in emergency services...

[chengkp75]

While I personally have nothing but contempt for Schettino (and refuse to acknowledge his rank), there was nothing in his professional history that predicted that he would act in this fashion in an emergency.  Until you are face to face with the beast, you never know whether you will run into the fire or away from it, regardless of how much training you have.  Some of the best personnel during training and drills will pack up in the real thing, and some who shy away during training will become heroic in an emergency.

[navybankerteacher]

Back on point:  there is no statute, and the possible necessity to control the off-ship environment, means that the captain might have valid reason to be among the first, or last, to leave the ship.  
 

The sad fact, however, is that in the twenty first century the traditions of our heroic past have been mothballed.  Since the “Birkenhead drill” is obsolete, and women are now to be seen as the equals of men in all contexts, why should anyone expect a captain to risk his life in an effort to be the last man off.

[TwinMamainMN]

@chengkp75 - thanks for including the link to the Costa Concordia official investigation report. I enjoyed reading it. I'm gobsmacked by it, but it was fascinating.

[chengkp75]

One of the most damning things I've found about the Concordia, were recordings from Schettino's girlfriend's phone, and the bridge voice recorder.  On them, Schettino is informed by the senior engineer on scene that there are three engine room compartments flooding (there were actually 4).  Schettino then says, "are you sure it's three compartments", and comments that if it were only two, the ship could stay afloat, but if it were three, the ship would definitely sink.  All modern cruise ships are "two compartment" ships, meaning that two adjacent watertight compartments can completely flood, and the ship will remain afloat, but that if more than two flood, there is nothing that can be done to keep the ship afloat.  So, Schettino acknowledges that he knows this, and is informed repeatedly that it is three compartments, and he does nothing.  Had he signaled for passenger muster at that time (within minutes of striking the rock), passengers would have been accounted for, and standing by the boats, and they could have all been launched while the ship was upright, as she did not start to list beyond the ability of the lifeboats to launch (15* list) for at least an hour after the allision.

[TwinMamainMN]

2 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

One of the most damning things I've found about the Concordia, were recordings from Schettino's girlfriend's phone, and the bridge voice recorder.  On them, Schettino is informed by the senior engineer on scene that there are three engine room compartments flooding (there were actually 4).  Schettino then says, "are you sure it's three compartments", and comments that if it were only two, the ship could stay afloat, but if it were three, the ship would definitely sink.  All modern cruise ships are "two compartment" ships, meaning that two adjacent watertight compartments can completely flood, and the ship will remain afloat, but that if more than two flood, there is nothing that can be done to keep the ship afloat.  So, Schettino acknowledges that he knows this, and is informed repeatedly that it is three compartments, and he does nothing.  Had he signaled for passenger muster at that time (within minutes of striking the rock), passengers would have been accounted for, and standing by the boats, and they could have all been launched while the ship was upright, as she did not start to list beyond the ability of the lifeboats to launch (15* list) for at least an hour after the allision.

Schettino could have saved so many lives and others from being injured if he would have been honest about the situation from the start and acted accordingly. I understand why you refuse to refer to him by his rank. He did not act like a captain and does not deserve the title.

[CruisingAlong4Now]

On 4/29/2024 at 4:56 PM, chengkp75 said:

While I personally have nothing but contempt for Schettino (and refuse to acknowledge his rank), there was nothing in his professional history that predicted that he would act in this fashion in an emergency.  Until you are face to face with the beast, you never know whether you will run into the fire or away from it, regardless of how much training you have.  Some of the best personnel during training and drills will pack up in the real thing, and some who shy away during training will become heroic in an emergency.

We never know how we or anyone will react until we are actually tested.

 

[CruiserBruce]

28 minutes ago, CruisingAlong4Now said:

We never know how we or anyone will react until we are actually tested.

 

I agree when talking about the average citizen. But for trained professionals, there are many steps and levels of training, screening and otherwise evaluating one's performance to weed out people whose reaction to stress and danger would be critical, and potentially fatal if panic set in.

 

I think in the Concordia, alcohol was involved, wasn't it, @chengkp75? Or just showing off for someone?

[chengkp75]

7 minutes ago, CruiserBruce said:

I agree when talking about the average citizen. But for trained professionals, there are many steps and levels of training, screening and otherwise evaluating one's performance to weed out people whose reaction to stress and danger would be critical, and potentially fatal if panic set in.

 

I think in the Concordia, alcohol was involved, wasn't it, @chengkp75? Or just showing off for someone?

I've known firefighters and EMT's that fold up at the first actual emergency, but let's face it, their careers are typically very short then.  I don't recall whether or not Schettino was found to be drinking, but I don't believe he was breathalyzed.  Merely incredibly poor judgement, but then again, the actual allision would not have proved fatal (to the ship, yes, to the passengers and crew, no) had he acted accordingly afterwards.  Even his claims of "steering" the ship back to ground on Giglio are false.  You don't "steer" a ship with no propulsion, let alone power.  And the forensic engineering shows that had the ship not drifted back to Giglio and grounded, it would have taken significantly longer to sink, and would have done so upright, if down by the stern.  What caused the ship to roll over was the second grounding at Giglio, where, as the ship continued to fill with water, the port side was grounded and could not sink any further, so the water filled the starboard side, causing the ship to roll over.  You'll note that Concordia was laying on her starboard side, while the tear in the hull was on the port side, and eventually up in the air, above water level.

[CruiserBruce]

16 minutes ago, chengkp75 said:

I've known firefighters and EMT's that fold up at the first actual emergency, but let's face it, their careers are typically very short then.  

The difference there is those personnel are not in any position of supervision or management. Rather, they are rookies, and probably being closely supervised.

[chengkp75]

7 minutes ago, CruiserBruce said:

The difference there is those personnel are not in any position of supervision or management. Rather, they are rookies, and probably being closely supervised.

Yes, but it is possible for someone in a supervisory position, especially on a ship, to have never faced a true at sea emergency.  Many mariners go their entire career without an emergency, just as many law enforcement officers go their entire career without drawing their firearm.  Is it the norm?  No, but not unheard of either.

Edited May 2 by chengkp75

[wcook]

Reminder, this was not the case of a otherwise fine captain panicking during an emergency. This was a captain with a pattern of inappropriate behavior that was known about by both corporate executives above him and bridge officers below him. All of whom enabled him instead of protecting the ship and passengers from him. On the day of the crash his actions both caused the accident and prevented the safe rescue of many passengers. Again, aided by butt covering and incompetence both above and below. 

[MBP&O2/O]

When I came ashore I got heavily involved in Contingency and Emergency Planning, especially with the Emergency Services.
We always tried to make our training as realistic and interesting as possible.
We used sneaky tactics such as concealing a heater in the 'control room' and cranking up the heat ..... quiet rumbling explosion type noises over the PA ... turn up the bass and creating a vibration.
In the debriefs the 'controllers' said it was frightening but they felt it was worthwhile and better than sitting bored in a lecture theatre.
For those that were 'disinterested' we often played a tape of an Emergency call of a distressed person who was drowning, and subsequently died. It usually grabbed their attention.
I managed a trip to London to visit the temporary mortuary set up after the London bombings. That was heartbreaking but the information that was passed on to trainees was another attention grabber.
Sometimes of course it was the old horse to water syndrome.

[PoofCat99]

2 hours ago, MBP&O2/O said:

When I came ashore I got heavily involved in Contingency and Emergency Planning, especially with the Emergency Services.
We always tried to make our training as realistic and interesting as possible.
We used sneaky tactics such as concealing a heater in the 'control room' and cranking up the heat ..... quiet rumbling explosion type noises over the PA ... turn up the bass and creating a vibration.
In the debriefs the 'controllers' said it was frightening but they felt it was worthwhile and better than sitting bored in a lecture theatre.
For those that were 'disinterested' we often played a tape of an Emergency call of a distressed person who was drowning, and subsequently died. It usually grabbed their attention.
I managed a trip to London to visit the temporary mortuary set up after the London bombings. That was heartbreaking but the information that was passed on to trainees was another attention grabber.
Sometimes of course it was the old horse to water syndrome.

A veterinarian friend of mine helps local law enforcement & rescue train for emergencies involving horses. He tries to incorporate some handling of real animals, although it is hard to predict how any animal will react in a given situation. 

[wcook]

39 minutes ago, PoofCat99 said:

although it is hard to predict how any animal will react in a given situation. 

 I have a beagle. Although he has never been in an emergency situation, I know how he will react. He will beg for food. 

[PoofCat99]

20 minutes ago, wcook said:

 I have a beagle. Although he has never been in an emergency situation, I know how he will react. He will beg for food. 

😄 Horses are either going for homicide or suicide. Except for my big guy. He was all about food.

[Heidi13]

On 4/29/2024 at 1:17 AM, Donald said:

Easy answer. The Captain (overall in command and completely responsible), and the Hotel Manager (responsible for evacuating all crew and pax) wait until all crew and pax are accounted for and evacuated.

Then they can leave the ship on one of the final boats or rafts.

 

On the Costa Concordia, three officers received prison sentences. The Hotel Manager received the longest sentence.

Only the Captain - or someone designated by him - can signal Abandon Ship. Under International Law, nobody can abandon ship until the Captain makes that command. On Concordia, everyone was waiting for the Captain to make the Command - but he was not onboard. The Hotel Manager was managing the evacuation, but could not send pax to the boats without the Masters Command.

When pax tried to go to the boats, the Hotel Manager sent them back to their cabins to wait for the Abandon Ship Command that never came. Those pax died in their cabins.

 

Yes, the Captain is clearly in overall command, but the Purser/Hotel Manager is not responsible for the evacuation of the crew and pax. The Purser/Hotel Manager directs the hotel crew responsible for mustering the pax, following the orders of the Master. In the event of an evacuation, the Survival Craft Stations are managed by an Officer, most likely a Deck Officer, but could be an Engineering Officer.

 

BTW - there is NO signal for abandon ship, it is a verbal command issued by the Master, or his/her designate. The Master will only issue the Abandon Ship Order, when the risk of remaining aboard the vessel exceeds the risk of abandoning the vessel. Lets also not forget, more people have been killed/seriously injured by Survival Craft than have been saved by them.

 

The biggest issue on Concordia, was the Master did not sound the General Emergency Signal to muster pax at the Assembly Stations, immediately after the grounding and especially after being advised the hull was breached.

[Heidi13]

On 4/28/2024 at 8:32 PM, thermal said:

I just finished reading about the Costa Concordia incident, and that the Captain is in jail.  My understanding is that he fell into a lifeboat and subsequently abandoned ship. 
 

On the other hand, I would find it hard to believe that in modern times the captain is expected to go down with the ship like in Titanic (please correct me if I’m wrong).  
 

So when is it appropriate for the captain to abandon ship?  Some kind of middle ground?  

 

There is no Maritime Law that expects the Master to go down with the vessel. In fact, the Master is responsible and accountable for the safety of the vessel, cargo and the entire ship's compliment, which includes the Master.

 

Being in overall Command and Control, the Master has a number of Senior Officers and Managers who manage individual components of the emergency response. Unless the Bridge is compromised, the best location for the Master is the Bridge. During an emergency, the Master is still responsible for navigating the vessel and collision avoidance. Tough tasks to perform from a position where you could "Fall" into a survival craft (lifeboat).

 

The Master has officers and ratings on the Bridge to assist with internal/external communications and propulsion control/navigation. He/she has other officers in charge of engineering, emergency response, preparing survival craft, mustering pax, etc. This is best accomplished from the Bridge, which has excellent communications, both internal and external.

 

Once the Master determines the situation warrants the mustering of pax to the Assembly Stations, he/she orders sounding the General Emergency Signal ( at least 7 short + 1 prolonged ring on the General Alarm). In the Concordia incident, I would have done this immediately after the grounding. If not already sounded, it SHOULD have been sounded immediately after the Master was advised of 3 compartments breeched. At that point the Master should have been looking for a safe area to beach the vessel.

 

With 4 compartments breached, if a safe beaching area was not available, it would have been prudent to immediately order the orderly movement of pax from the Assembly Stations to the Survival Craft. At that point, I would have issued the order to Abandon Ship, after discussing the situation with the Chief Engineer, to determine the resources he/she required to manage the flooding and resultant issues. All other crew would be released from Emergency Stations to Abandon Ship Stations.

 

At this point, the Master should remain on the Bridge, managing the evacuation through the designated Officers and Managers. The Master receives information regarding the status of mustering pax and crew members, so would be aware of any unaccounted for, and efforts being taken to locate. Once all pax are evacuated, they would commence with the remaining crew members, using any remaining lifeboats and liferafts. The Bridge should receive updated counts of those evacuated off the vessel.

 

As the evacuation of all less essential crew is complete, the Master would then have a call with the Chief Engineer to evacuate the machinery spaces and get all remaining crew to the liferafts. The Master may remain aboard with key Deck & Engineering Officers, if they have a reasonable chance of saving the vessel, otherwise the Master will be in the last raft with the logbook and other key documents.